Rav Ashi states that if the kohen gadol brought in two sets of ketores - one was proper and the other was missing ingredients, he will not be חייב for entering for no reason, however he will be חייב for burning a קטרת חסרה. The Ritva qualifies this ruling only if he burned both of them, however if was only מקטיר the 'missing' one, he still will be חייב for entering unnecessarily, for he did not fulfill the mitzva. The Avnei Neizer (21:6) says that according to Rashi's explanation in ביאה ריקנית - that it is a ביאה שלא לצורך, he would disagree, for in this instance, he went in for a purpose. He had a proper קטרת in his hand and could have been מקטיר it and therefore even if he ultimately was only מקטיר the 'missing' one - he still would not be חייב for entering for no reason.Read more!
Saturday, July 29, 2006
The comments have been busy with the source for a klaf... try here.
In the Sefer Yam Hatalmud, he asks based on a Gemora in Shevuos, which learns according to the opinion of Rebbe that Yom Kippur will automatically be mechaper for any aveiros that are not specific for Yom Kippur. If so, what is our Gemora asking? If the issur is burning the ketores when it is missing an ingredient, this is an issur exclusive to Yom Kippur and he can be punished for it, but if the issur is entering the Kodesh Kodoshim for no reason, that is relevant the entire year and Yom Kippur will give him an atonement immediately? (See שמועת חיים for a possible answer.)
Friday, July 28, 2006
Tosfos Yeshanim asks on why does it mention the flowers by the staff of Aharon if they grew into almonds, there were no flowers? He answers that there were both. Some remained flowers and others grew into almonds. Look at the Das Zkanim and decide if he says the same pshat. The Ritva explains that some of the flowers remained in order to magnify the miracle.
See Tzachi's comment from Reb Moshe - great lesson!
Posted by Avromi at 7/28/2006 10:29:00 AM
The Gemora states that when the Aron was hidden, so too the jug of man, shemen hamishcha and Aharon's staff were hidden with it. The Gemora learns a gezeira Shove to teach this. The Gevuros Ari asks that it would seem odd that we are using a gezeira shove to teach us something that happened many years later? He learns differently in the Gemora. The gezeira shove is teaching us that these items were adjacent to the aron in the Kodesh Kodoshim. Once we know that, we can assume that when the aron was placed in geniza, these objects went along.
Are there gezeira shoves that teach us things that happened later?
Posted by Avromi at 7/28/2006 10:18:00 AM
Please do not forget to look at the sidebar on the right of the screen (there were some issues previously regarding the sidebar slipping to the bottom and we worked extensively on this and b"H fixed it - if on some of your computers there still is a problem, please don't hesitate to notify me) for the daf yomi's discussion site. Rabbi Spero has Torah on today's daf. Thank you and good Shabbos.Read more!
Posted by Avromi at 7/28/2006 09:40:00 AM
The Gemara states that the king Yoshiyahu hid the Aron towards the end of the First Bais HaMikdash era. It is hard to imagine how one could hide an article like the Aron that contained so much sanctity. Yet, every week people who are unaware of the holiness of Shabbos, so to speak conceal the sanctity of Shabbos. The sanctity of Shabbos should be palpable on the streets of our neighborhoods, as a Torah observant Jew should dress appropriately for Shabbos and even the way one walks should be in accordance with the holiness of Shabbos. Shabbos is not a time for playing ball and exercising. HaShem gave us Shabbos as a day of rest, which is meant to be a time to study Torah and educate others about the sanctity of Shabbos and Jewish life.
For more inspiring thought about Shabbos, please visit www.torahthoughts.com
Posted by Avromi at 7/28/2006 07:55:00 AM
A student of the Rosh brings from his Rebbe that they used to fold over the end of the peroches on Erev Yom Kippur to enable the kohen gadol to enter into the Kodesh Kodoshim on Yom Kippur. The rest of the year it remained closed, so the kohanim should not see that area (between the other curtain), for that might have the sanctity of the Kodesh Kodoshim.
Rebbe Meir holds that this is the reason why the kohen gadol would walk between the shulchan and the mizbeach and not by the wall, for then he might feast his eyes on the Kodesh Kodoshim (Rashi).
Reb Dovid Meyers in his Sefer Mileches Hamishkan brings a proof to this from a Mishna in Menochos which states that there were kohanim on both sides of the shulchan placing the lechem hapanim and the bezichin onto the shulchan. If the peroches was opened all year, why weren't we concerned that they might gaze at the Kodesh Kodoshim? Obviously, it was closed during the year.
Posted by Avromi at 7/28/2006 07:31:00 AM
Tosfos Yeshanim (printed on 52a) brings a Gemora in Pesachim which implies that a temurah (exchange animal) from a korban Pesach is valid for the Pesach. If so, he asks, then it should be docheh Shabbos? He answers that one cannot fulfill his obligation for the korban for there is a rule stating that an obligation korban can only be brought from chulin and the temurah korban received its kedusha from the original animal. The meaning of the Gemora in Pesachim is that it must be eaten as if it would be a Pesach.
There is a famous chakirah by temurah. Where does the kedusha come from? Is it from the original korban, meaning that the owner actually transferred the kedusha from the initial korban onto the second and the Torah gave kedusha back to the first one. Or do we say that the owner accomplished nothing by making a temurah, however the Torah placed kedusha on the second one.
According to the former, it is understood why one cannot fulfill his obligation on a mandated korban for the kedusha did not come from chulin, rather it came from the first animal, however, according to the latter explanation, the kedusha did not come from the first one, rather the Torah gave it kedusha when he tried to make a temurah - if so, why can't he fulfill his mitzva of bringing a korban Pesach with the temurah?
Posted by Avromi at 7/28/2006 07:25:00 AM
The Mishna states that the kohen gadol would walk between the two curtains as he entered the Kodesh Kodoshim. The space in between them was only one cubit foot. The Yerushalmi says that he would push out both curtains with his elbows as he walked through. The Pnei Moshe explains this by pointing out that in his right hand he was holding the pan with the hot coals and in his left hand was the ketores. He had to be extremely careful not to burn the peroches.Read more!
Posted by Avromi at 7/28/2006 06:57:00 AM
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Rashi states that there are five korban חטאות that have a דין of מיתה on them. The Ritva brings from a פסיקתא that an acronym to remember them by is ותמנע.
ו - ולד חטאת
ת - תמורה
מ - מתה בעליה
נ - נתכפרו הבעלים
ע - עברה שנתה
תמנע was the concubine of עשו. Perhaps we can say בדרך דרוש based on a Gemora in סנהדרין. She was a daughter of a king and wanted to convert and the אבות did not accept her. She went and married עשו proclaiming that it is preferable to be the maidservant of this great nation rather than being a princess in a lowly nation. It is her name that we utilize to illustrate these korbanos which are possul and invalidated and results in death, yet they are still regarded as a korban.
Posted by Avromi at 7/27/2006 12:23:00 PM
The classical pshat in the kohanim reciving an anotement only מקופיא is that it is floating or hovering over the korban and not an actual כפרה. Rabbeinu Chananel learns it in a different way. He states that מקופיא is derived from the word הקפה - circle or surround. Therefore he learns that the kohanim are only considered partners from the time of ווידוי - confession, when they all gather around to hear it. It comes out that after the ווידוי, the kohen gadol would certainly not be allowed to make a תמורה from it, because by then everyone would be considered the בעלים.Read more!
Posted by Avromi at 7/27/2006 11:39:00 AM
The Minchas Chinuch (325) quotes Rashi that whenever a mitzva mandates לכם - it has to be yours, if one owns less than a שוה פרוטה, it is also lacking לכם. He asks that according to that, how will people fulfill the mitzva of ערבה on Sukkos when each stem is valued as less than a שוה פרוטה? (Tell that to our Esrog dealers!!!!) It is answered that Rashi did not intend to say that something can't be yours if you own in it less than a שוה פרוטה. Rashi holds that to be considered a partner with others, you must possess at least a פרוטה. This is evident from a Ritva in Avoda Zara and in Sefer Tal Torah.
A question is asked on this Ritva from a Gemora in Kidushin which states that all of Klal Yisroel were considered partners in one קרבן פסח even though they did not have a שוה פרוטה? Iמ Sefer לב איש, he answers based on a Tosfos on our daf. The Gemora states that the פר of the kohen is not deemed a korban of partners, for the atonement from this korban only hovers over the other kohanim and therefore it is judged to be a korban of an individual (and one can make תמורה from it). Tosfos asks from a Gemora in Zevachim that rules on a korban from two sons who inherited it from their father, that it is considered a קרבן שותפין, even though a יורש only receives atonement in the form of מקופיא - hovering over them? Tosfos answers that when everyone has an equal share in the כפרה, even if it's only a minor one, they are considered partners, however by the פר of the kohen gadol, he is considered the full owner for he receives atonement בקביעותא and therefore the other kohanim are not regarded as partners. This is why all of Klal Yisroel can be considered partners, for they all have an equal share.
Posted by Avromi at 7/27/2006 10:45:00 AM
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
The Gemora quotes a ברייתא that a drunkard is unfit to do the avodah in the בית המקדש. Tosfos discusses the various opinions as to which liquids will one be חייב מיתה for and to which will there be only a transgression and will the avodah be כשר or not. The Rambam in Hilchos Tefillah rules that a kohen who drinks wine is not allowed to דוכן. The לחם משנה asks that the Rambam rules like Rebbe Yehuda that for drinking wine and doing the avodah, he will be חייב מיתה and for other drinks that cause one to become intoxicated, there is a לאו, if so, by Hilchos Tefillah he should mention that a kohen will not be allowed to duchen if he drinks other drinks as well?
My cousin, Rav Sholom Shapiro answers this question by learning a different pshat in the Rambam in ביאת המקדש. He does not rule in accordance with Rebbe Yehuda, for if so the avodah should be invalidated and the Rambam explicitly states that it is כשר. (I don't know how the לחם משנה would explain this.) The rationale of the Rambam is based on a Mishna in Bechoros that states that one who is שיכור is not allowed to do the avodah because it is considered a מום - a blemish and a blemish which is only applicable to a person and not an animal does not invalidate the korban. This explains why by ברכת כהנים, the Rambam only mentions wine for that is learned from the passuk - יין ושכר אל תשת, however a כהן who drinks other liquids and is rendered a בעל מום, he would still be permitted to דוכן.
Posted by Avromi at 7/26/2006 10:28:00 AM
The Gemora learns out from a passuk in Divrei Hayomim that the avodoh of holacha will be kosher if it is performed by a Yisroel. (Rav M.M. Shulzinger wonders why the Gemora doesn't bring an earlier passuk in perek 30 which indicates the same halacha?) The passuk concludes והלויים מפשיטים - and the Leviim skinned the animals. Tosfos Yeshonim states that a Yisroel (or Levi) is permitted to do the skinning. He is bothered as to why the Gemora previously on daf 26 did not bring this passuk down as a source to prove that hafshata is kosher by a זר? He answers that this passuk is only דברי קבלה and we were searching for a source מן התורה. HaRav Chaim Kanievsky is greatly troubled by this question. Throughout Shas, whenever hafshata is discussed, it is always in respect to a קרבן עולה - this is the only korban that there is a din of hafshata, however by קרבן פסח, which is what the passuk in דברי הימים is referring to, why would I think that there would be a necessity to have a kohen do it, this is not an avodah and we cannot learn from there to the halachos of an olah? On this question, Rav M. M. Shulzinger comments, that it is קשה כברזל.Read more!
Posted by Avromi at 7/26/2006 09:16:00 AM
Here is a video by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Kemitza and Chafina. In it, there are many parts of today's Gemora explained thoroughly, as it is being demonstrated by Rav Mordechai Kornfeld. Yasher Kochacha.
Posted by Avromi at 7/26/2006 09:05:00 AM
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
(Don't forget to scroll down and view the video - it is relevant for today's daf as well.)
The Gemora concluded that it is preferable that a fat kohen should perform the kemitza in order that the flour should not remain between his fingers. In Hagaos Yaavetz, he wonders if this actually transpires that a skinny kohen would forego the avodah of kemitza and allow a fat kohen to do it. This conclusion is omitted by the Rambam. The Geomora arrives at the same conclusion regarding the chafina of the kohen gadol on Yom Kippur. The Chafetz Chaim comments that the Rambam omits this halacha as well for it is not found anyplace a requirement to become a kohen gadol is to be fat. The Yaavetz mentions that perhaaps jsut like a kohen gadol must be handsome and strong as a prerequisite to being appointed, so too, he must be fat.
The question remains, though. Why did the Rambam omit these halachos by kemitza and chafinah?
Posted by Avromi at 7/25/2006 10:20:00 AM
Tosfos poses a solution to the dilemma of that Gemora, based on our Gemora that his hands will be regarded as a כלי שרת. He can hold the ketores in his hands and place the מחתה on top of it. When he enters the Kodesh Kodoshim, let him loosen his hands enabling the ketores to fall to the ground, place the coals down and then scoop up the ketores (which will now be allowed) and put it on the coals.
Monday, July 24, 2006
It is interesting to note that our Mishna (or Gemora) makes no mention of the salting of the ketores of Yom Kippur. Every korban requires salt before it is brought on the mizbeach. The ketores which was burned regularly had a melicha (salting) while it was still on the outside mizbeach. The Minchas Chinuch (118) states that it is obvious that the Yom Kippur ketores also required salt and that after the kohen gadol did the first chafina (filling up his hands with the ketores) he would go up to the mizbeach and place salt on it. The Mikdash Dovid (13) disagrees and holds that the regular ketores which was burned on a mizbeach required salting, howeverthe Yom Kippur ketores which was burned on the floor of the Kodesh Kodoshim is not included in the passuk על כל קרבנך תקריב מלח. His proof is from the fact that there is no mention in the Mishnayos in Yoma for this.Read more!
Posted by Avromi at 7/24/2006 07:52:00 AM
Sunday, July 23, 2006
The answer is that although it appears that the glory of the Kohen Gadol was only external, the truth is that his glory emanated from his modesty. The Torah states you shall make vestments of sanctity for Aharon your brother, for glory and splendor. Kavod, glory, is an external pride, where people see the beautiful vestments and are in awe of the stature of the Kohen Gadol. Tiferes, splendor, is an internal beauty.
It is said for the lips of the Kohen should safeguard knowledge, and people should seek teaching from his mouth; for he is an agent of HaShem, Master of Legions. The Kohen reflects knowledge, which is internal, and this knowledge must be safeguarded. One can only safeguard knowledge if there is modesty, which was the trait that Kimchis exemplified. By conducting herself modestly, Kimchis was able to merit perpetual modesty through her sons who served as Kohanim Gedolim.
THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Yoma 043: Bigdei Kehunah by Parah Adumah
The gemora asks that its a kalv'chomer if one needs the k"g to do the
parah that for sure he wears the bigdei kehuna. The Gemora's only
answer is 'torach v'casav lah kra.' The rambam and others hold that
when the k"g does the parah adumah, he wears the bigdei kohen hedyot.
Couldn't we answer the gemora's kasha that the possuk is needed for
this chidush that he doesnt wear 8, but rather 4? (w/o complete iyun)
Avrohom Adler, Cleve, USA
The Kollel replies:
The Rambam in Perush ha'Mishnayos Parah (4:1) writes that we learn
that the Kohen Gadol wears four Begadim when he does the Avodos of
the Parah from a Gezeirah Shaveh. Presumably, the Gemara did not
suggest your answer because it knew the Gezeirah Shaveh.
Posted by Avromi at 7/23/2006 11:38:00 PM
The Chemdas Yisroel brings a Yerushalmi that holds that the burning of the fats on the mizbeach would be considered bishul regarding Shabbos. According to this, he asks the following question. why is it permitted to burn the fats on the mizbeach in the beginning of Shabbos, it would be advantageous to wait until a few minutes prior to sunset, while they still would be fulfilling the mitzva of haktara (which must be done on Shabbos), they would not have to transgress the issur of bishul?
He proves from this question that if one initiates the process of bishul on Shabbos, even though it does not cook until after Shabbos, he would still be violating the issur of bishul.
Does anyone have any other proofs to this or kashos on this yesod?
Posted by Avromi at 7/23/2006 10:14:00 AM
The Mishna had previously stated that every day they would bring a p'ras of ketores in the morning and afternoon. It would seem that this was done on Shabbos, as well. Gevuros Ari asks that according to Rashi in Zevachim (109) that holds midoraysa, a kezayis of ketores would be sufficient, why is it permissible to burn the entire amount - the extra should be considered a burning for no purpose and should not be allowed?
The Acharonim answer this question based on a Netziv that holds that once a person begins doing a mitzva and in the process he does more than he is required of doing, all the extra is considered to be part of the mitzva.
There are many examples to this yesod. Care to share one with us?
Posted by Avromi at 7/23/2006 09:50:00 AM
In Shulchan Aruch it is paskened that when there is a ברית מילה on Shabbos, it is preferable that the same מוהל should perform the מילה and the פריעה. Rama disagrees and says that it can be split up and one can do the מילה and the other can perform the פריעה. His proof is from the עבודה in the בית המקדש on Shabbos, which can be done by many כהנים. The גרא says that there is a basic distinction between the two. Performing the עבודה on Shabbos is הותרה and that is why many כהנים can participate, however מילה is only דחויה and hence should be done by one. The Beis Halevi defends the Rama and explains that there is a difference between the עבודה of שחיטה which is הותרה and the עבודה of הקטרה which is only דחויה. The rationale behind this distinction is that שחיטה must be done on Shabbos for there is a mitzva to bring these קרבנות today, however regarding הקטרה, it actually can be done afterwards - after Shabbos, but since there is a concept of חביבין מצוה בשעתה, it is done on Shabbos. The Rama's proof can be from הקטרה which is דחויה and nevertheless performed by many כהנים. Look at שמועת חיים for further details.Read more!
Posted by Avromi at 7/23/2006 03:34:00 AM
The Gemora states that one can hold that Shabbos is הותרה בציבור and nevertheless hold that טומאה is דחויה. The חתם סופר and the מהרץ חיות ask on a כסף משנה that equates the היתר of פיקוח נפש on שבת to the היתר of טומאה by קרבנות. They are both הותרה or both דחויה. It seems clear from our Gemora that this is not the case?Read more!
Posted by Avromi at 7/23/2006 02:26:00 AM
Daf Yomi - Yoma 46 - Zerika on Shabbos - What's Wrong?
It is clear from Rashi and Tosfos on this daf that a possuk is necessary to teach us that shechita and zerika (the sprinkling of the blood) is permitted on Shabbos. Reshash is bothered as to what the issur would be to perform zerikas hadam on Shabbos? The Rashba in Menochos (21) seems to indicate that the predicament would be that the azarah is considered reshus harabim. The Mishna in Tamid states that if a sheretz was found in the azarah on Shabbos, they would turn a pot over it. The Rosh comments that the difficulty was that the sheretz is deemed to be muktza. He quotes others who explain that it would be forbidden to transport it on Shabbos for the azarah is reshus harabim. He disagrees vehemently with this, for the Gemora Pesachim states that it is regarded as reshus harabim only in respect to the halachos of tumah, but not for Shabbos. It would seem obvious that the azarah is not reckoned as a reshus harabim for it is surrounded by walls and the doors are locked at night?
Why would zerikas hadam be considered a violation of Shabbos, that we need a passuk to say that it is acceptable?
Posted by Avromi at 7/23/2006 01:53:00 AM